Change in missile defense strategy is continuity and not rupture
23/09/2009The president of the United States, Barack Obama, He said it will cancel the missile shield project in Europe. More than a decision of military strategy, or even a government breakup Bush, it consolidates a deeper trend in the position that the United States seeks to play in the world. Power pole, the United States are becoming system stabilizers.
Much more than a break with the policies of his predecessor, George W. Bush, this change in the direction of the action confirms the change of the axis of US foreign policy developed since the Cold War. The Star Wars project, launched by President Reagan in 1983, It laid the foundation for the design of an international presence focused on defense continental US. Over the years, international conditions have been changing and the relative power of the United States decreasing, which has forced a continuous increase in power sharing with other international actors.
The initial basic idea was to achieve a "shield" the US territory, so that the United States disporiam of strike capability - including atomic - while not suffer the risk of an attack by any other power. In this sense, the main objective was to achieve an unquestionable power, that definitely confirm the centrality of the United States in the world.
Em George W. Bush the focus changes a bit to suit the new logics. The shield becomes geographically determined, seeking the expansion of NATO (Otan). Missiles in Poland and radar in the Czech Republic not only represent technical choices, but, about everything, political choices. These countries were Russian influence zone for a long time and represent the continued expansion of the zone of influence of NATO, in addition to being able to provide a protective barrier to Europe, both on Iran, As in Russia and in China.
In this sense, Bush changed the logic advocated for Reagan in that abandoned the idea of fighting an enemy (Russia) and will operate with allied defense logic (Europa da Otan). Thereby, the United States begin to share some of the responsibility for the pursuit of global stability with other countries. Although it is not possible to say that the United States stood for Bush to give up its centrality in the international system, it became clear that no more could determine the international game alone.
Obama, in its turn, change the model to fit the new reality. However, also can not say that it means a break with Bush policy. Obama did not abandon the military logic and remains conscious of the need for the US territory defense and its main partners. Bush built important bases in Alaska and California, and these will be retained. Obama has not abandoned the idea of a protective barrier against possible Iranian attacks, only adapted its operations to existing technologies (short-range missiles) without implying in discomfort to other powers, as is the case of Russia.
It is important to note that Obama also maintains a very active policy against the strengthening of their enemies. Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, He declared recently that North Korea and Iran already have gone too far in the development of atomic weapons, indicating that the United States is increasingly uncomfortable and, like this, prepared for interventions.
Thereby, Obama makes clear its traditional European partners, as well as other countries in the region that are not fully aligned with the United States, that the priority now is to prevent the attack on them. Part of the domestic criticism of Obama goes precisely in this direction, arguing that Iran could develop long-range missiles, which would leave the US territory under threat. However the idea is to ensure the protection not only in military terms, but also in terms of creating a network of interdependence and stability leading to protection of the United States.
This is not a discussion between a Bush focused on military power or an Obama focused on diplomacy as a way to sustain US global leadership. More than that, Obama improves and makes appropriate a leadership model developed over 25 years.
*Rodrigo Cintra* He is currently head of the Department of International Relations ESPM. It is post-doctoral student in Territorial Competitiveness and Creative Industries (ISCTE, Lisboa), PhD in International Relations (UNB, Brasilia), Master in Political Science (USP, Sao Paulo) and a BA in International Relations (PUC-SP, Sao Paulo) and director of Focus R.I.
originally published in: Jornal do Brazil – first Notebook, 23 September 2009.
http://jbonline.terra.com.br/pextra/2009/09/22/e22097435.asp